tinman

Re: The first 5 years

Okay, this is kind of an offshoot of my Wwyddiyryc thread. What do you imagine the reactions of major world governments and religious groups would be within the first 5 years of the sudden emergence of a few thousand people (worldwide) with significant metahuman powers? I don't mean reactions to heroes and villains, or vigilantes. I mean just the response to the emergence of these highly gifted people scattered randomly around the world. Specifics: It has only been five years since the first public case, but some governments (like the US) knew about a few secretive early bloomers as far back as 20 years ago. All metas share a common origin for their abilities, which is that they are the fourth and fifth generation descendents of people exposed to an experimental substance prior to WWII. Metahumans seem to be appearing in proportions representative of population numbers (so China has about a fifth of all metahumans). There is no super tech. None. Would there be a scramble to try to control these "national assets"? Would the major religions persecute them, revere them, or treat them like any other souls in need of salvation? Would corporations start throwing buckets of money at them to employ them in R&D? Would they become automatic celebrities? How much resentment would everyday people have for these superhumans?

Re: Wwyddiyryc? Or an online database of generic NPC personalities, maybe one for each letter of the alphabet (Andy the Army Recruiter, Betty the Barmaid, Cory the Cod Fisherman, Dennis the Dean of Metahuman Studies...).

Re: Wwyddiyryc? It would require the players to want that type of campaign. The group I have would not enjoy hunting their former PC's while playing what they would interpret as shills of the governments they've come to despise (though I would enjoy it very much). I could probably make it work, but there would be resistance. And besides, this way I can tweak the setting with all the changes I've come up with since I first launched it. This idea holds a lot of appeal for me, but in the end I think it will be simpler and easier (and probably more enjoyable for the group as a whole) to do the reboot. I most certainly will be adding thinly veiled "homages" to the old PC's as key villains in the rebooted campaign though. They don't get off completely

Re: Wwyddiyryc? I'm a big fan of a low-DEX game as well. Not that MA and Speedsters shouldn't have the DEX to back it up, but the idea that a 20 DEX was considered pretty much minimal for a Brick always struck me as absurd. I love skill levels though.

Re: Wwyddiyryc? Thanks, I will be making a big effort to make sure that everyone starts on the same page this time. I'll be lucky if I write down notes on each session, much less actually post the "continuing story", but maybe...

Re: Wwyddiyryc? That's totally me too.

Re: Wwyddiyryc? The problem is that the world that has developed around them is violently anti-metahuman almost entirely due to their actions. Those metas who aren't on international shoot-on-sight lists are being rounded up and pressed into government service or quietly assassinated. Any new metahuman "do-gooders" are going to be facing a very steep uphill climb (though starting their careers by sorting out the old PC's would be the best possible start). At this point though, a reboot is really the only way to cleanse the pallet and make the campaign enjoyable for all concerned.

Re: Wwyddiyryc?

Re: Wwyddiyryc? I tend to run strongly simulationist games, and my current campaign is a "supers in the real world" setting. Right off the bat the PC's took on a haughty attitude concerning government authorities and law enforcement. Essentially they acted expediently and beyond the law when they felt it necessary and refused to cooperate with the authorities when they found it inconvenient. This attitude led to strained relations and no desire on the part of the powers that be to give the PC's any benefit of the doubt or slack at all. Over the length of the campaign the situation became worse and much more tense. After the PC's were instrumental in the destruction of Manhattan (mostly through overconfidence) they became hunted criminals. The players were frustrated by this and wanted their characters to regain the public trust somehow, but the hubris of their PC's and the magnitude of the mistakes they had made kept it from being a real possibility. Hence the reboot. The players are putting together an "all-star" team made up of their favourite characters and everyone is starting with a clean slate and a better attitude. Sort of like Marvel's Ultimate stuff in reverse. It's worth a try, but you may find that you have player resentment if everyone doesn't start at an even point total. Some groups are better about this than others.

Re: Wwyddiyryc? One thing a friend of mine did that I thought was interesting was provide a one-time discount on skills. Any skill bought during character creation received an automatic upgrade to the next level (8- became 11-, 11- became attr/5+9-, attr/5+9- gained +1).

Re: Wwyddiyryc? I'm dropping my PC's back to 250 or thereabouts. I like a good selection of skills on the PC's, but their previous characters had wandered up into the 700 point range and I want them to have a look at the world from a little closer to ground level again.

(What Would You Do Differently If You Rebooted Your Campaign?) I've decided to bite the bullet and do a complete reboot within my campaign world. The main reason is that the PC's have dug themselves into such a deep hole with regards to their relations with (insert entire world here) that I doubt they'll be able to pull themselves out. The game has become frustrating for several players because of this, and I'm not having as much fun with it as I'd like (or deserve) to have. The biggest change will be that the characters will have a clean slate (for as long as that lasts). I will be using the same campaign world, but with changes to reflect what I now know works and doesn't work. I will also be taking out campaign elements that I now cringe about and putting in new and cool ideas that I've had (and which will surely make me cringe years down the road). So in all this I started wondering what other folks might do differently with their games if they had it all to do over again.

Re: New Power: Invulnerability One thing this power would be good for is to provide a character with the ability to survive obscene amounts of physical harm (like from a nuke) but still not really have it affect most fights. Of course, you can get nearly the same effect with 75% Resistant Damage Reduction vs. BODY damage only...as long as it's not a really really big nuke.

Re: New Power: Invulnerability Nice! My initial reaction was that it was way too cheap, but... If you spend the same amount of points on resistant defense with the -1 Limitation: Only vs. BODY, you wind up with about 40 rDEF in a given category, which might as well be invulnerability to BODY damage if you aren't throwing nukes around. So I think the point cost is fine. -edit- beaten to the punch, this thread moves fast!

Re: Ever have one of those moments when... If you have the inclination to do so (and your enjoyment of your own game should take precedence) I would suggest running with it. First, discuss with the players the direction that their character's actions will likely take the campaign (fair warning and all that). See if they would prefer to simply make up new characters or even reboot the campaign. Next, start introducing consequences for their actions. Maybe go a little light on the whole "brought in by UNTIL/PRIMUS" aspect at first (even if they deserve it) because that sort of thing pretty much means it's a villain campaign from then on. Do they have any government ties? Sever them. Do they have any corporate or private sponsorship? Dry it up. If they have a base put it under surveillance by law enforcement. Let them know that the State Department (assuming they are based in the US) is bending over backwards to smooth things over with Mongolia and the President is pissed off because he's kissing ambassadorial *** over the actions of these clowns. Make sure that they understand that they are on very thin ice. Do they have any loved-ones as DNPC's who know their super identities? What if their spouses or children are afraid of them or condemn their actions? Ultimately, if their actions become so reckless or criminal that they have pretty much become villains and need to be taken down, have the players do it themselves. Have the players make up a new group of characters who's first mission is to bring in these rogues. Make sure that everyone is on the same page with regards to the mood and theme with the new group of PC's.

Re: What do you think...

Re: What do you think... The theme of the game is the exporation of the effects and consequences of the use of power, so I tend to let the players go in the direction that feels right for their characters. The problem with using another hero for the "I remember what you did" thing is that a hero might be listened to by the general public. If I use a villain, his or her only recourse would be to confront the PC's because no one would listen. Also I really like the idea of them being treated as heroes for beating up the one guy that knows the truth about them. If they walk away from that without a twinge of conscience then I can feel free to throw anything at them

Re: What do you think... After realizing that they couldn't hold up the tanker they tried to force it's path over to one side so that it would fall clear of the island. Unfortunately they just didn't have the juice to move it very far, and they backed off right before impact. Afterwards they tried to help with rescue and evacuation, and only when it seemed that no more people were in immediate danger did they leave (and then they fled the country). The villainess who was holding the tanker up was killed in the fight, and her companions scattered once the PC's were distracted. Since the "demonstration" had been going on for about 20 minutes before the PC's arrived, there were plenty of news cameras and camcorders filming the events (though the ones closest to the action were probably not recovered). I'm really liking the suggestions so far guys, thanks for the great stuff!

Re: What do you think... You're right about the whole "ends justify the means" part. The team has been inching closer and closer to The Authority way of doing things over the course of the campaign. The tanker tragedy notwithstanding, they have been asking to be taken down a notch for a while now. Time to put my evil plotting cap on...

Re: What do you think... Nevertheless.

Re: What do you think... Stolen and repped, that's a great term.

Re: What do you think...

Re: What do you think... Fox News has been the bane of their existence...

Re: What do you think... The more I think about it the more I like the idea of a skewed timeline "fixing" things for them, but leaving them to deal with the guilt internally. Plus, considering how little everyone liked them up to then, they could use a fresh start in the reputation department.